The logic here is that in HA environment you can go without a secondary node because your standby will carry on a copy of your primary's editlogs. As an optimization you can cut off a checkpointing overhead.
Hope it helps, Cos On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 08:06PM, Leidle, Rob wrote: > I am running into an issue with the puppet installation, and I think it is a > bug (although I don’t want to submit a patch for it until I make sure I > understand the issue completely). When I do not specify a secondary name node > I am seeing both the namenode and the secondary name node being installed and > configured. The bug, I believe, is in the cluster.pp file: > > https://github.com/apache/bigtop/blob/master/bigtop-deploy/puppet/manifests/cluster.pp > > On line 224 the logic for secondary namenode is present: > > if ($hadoop_ha == "disabled") { hadoop::secondarynamenode { "secondary > namenode": > namenode_host => $hadoop_namenode_host, > namenode_port => $hadoop_namenode_port, > auth => $hadoop_security_authentication, > } > } > > So, I think this is in error and the code should only execute if $hadoop_ha > is not equal to “disabled”. Ie change the equals to a not equals. Can someone > who understands these puppet scripts chime in and let me know if this is the > appropriate patch to make? Or am I not understanding something about these > installations?
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
